Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly has resulted in discussion and debate
both in academic writings and in the courts. There exists a broad range
of opinions as to what exactly this decision means for notice pleading
and motions to dismiss in federal courts. This Note seeks to contribute
to this ongoing debate by injecting empirical data.

This empirical study is built around reported federal district
court cases. Every district court case citing Twombly in the context of
a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss was read and the disposition of the motion
recorded. The rates of dismissal were then compared to numerous control
groups- cases that cited Conley v. Gibson in the context of a 12(b)(6)
motion to dismiss.

The conclusions suggest that Bell Atlantic may not be having a
major impact on most areas of substantive law. However, it appears that
Bell Atlantic is having a disproportionate impact on civil rights
cases. These cases appear to be dismissed at a statistically higher
rate under Bell Atlantic than they were under Conley. This Note
proceeds in four parts. Part I provides context for the study by
examining the important Supreme Court precedents both before and after
Bell Atlantic as well as the response to Bell Atlantic in the legal
literature. Part II discusses the methodology of the empirical study,
while Part III presents the findings of the study in a variety of ways.
Finally, Part IV seeks to advance various hypotheses that could each
serve to explain the findings encountered in the study.